On Mar 18, 2015, at 7:01 AM, Jaap Akkerhuis <j...@nlnetlabs.nl> wrote:
> Tim Wicinski writes: > >> The WG has several documents that we need to spend time in Dallas moving >> towards completion. But we also believe the RFC 6761 drafts should not >> be given short shrift. >> >> Accordingly, we are tentatively planning a Virtual Interim Meeting to >> dive a little deeper on the special names drafts, including possible >> architectural implications of the apparent increase in interest in RFC >> 6761, as we attempt to muddle through the questions we’ve seen and the >> ones we anticipate. >> > > Following this discussion from a distance, I cannot help wondering > whether this is special names stuff might in violate RFC 2860 section 4.3. Making sure that any coordination needed is getting done seems to be a valid concern, yes. The IAB called this out in a liaison communication to ICANN last year; you can read it here: http://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1351/. best, Suzanne _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
